Bernie Sanders Tax Brackets

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Pay me a $2mill consulting fee and then you would only have to pay a 43% tax.

Yes, that would work. Of course I can just say fuck it, I am not doing this so that Bernie and henchmen get the money, I do the work and take the risk.
No skin off my backside if 20 jobs over a two year period just don't begin because Bernie made it not worth while.

Geez, people need to wake the fuck up!
 
Yes, that would work. Of course I can just say fuck it, I am not doing this so that Bernie and henchmen get the money, I do the work and take the risk.
No skin off my backside if 20 jobs over a two year period just don't begin because Bernie made it not worth while.

Geez, people need to wake the fuck up!

Wouldn't you be building the boats as a corporation for liability reasons? The corp could pay you a salary over a number of years to avoid the higher taxes. And considering how long it took you to build the original Mar Azul I'm sure it will take you a few years to build 3 of them. You're acting like you could just instantly pump these things out and suddenly have all this profit.

Considering that under the above tax table the rates actually go down if you make $464,000-$499,000 a year you would be wise to pay yourself that much every year.

There, I just earned my consulting fee. That will be $2 million. Thank you.
 
Yeah, no.

Those companies pay outrageous amounts of taxes. Don't buy Into bernies bullshit about that. This information is freely available online in the form of 10-ks for everyone to see.

The companies do get foreign tax credits that go against federal tax, but if you're for ending that, you'd have to admit you would be in agreement with donald trump on an issue.

Where's the Presidential Debate on GM's Crony Capitalism?

From Fox Business...

In the 1950s, General Motors President Charles Wilson famously said: “What was good for our country was good for General Motors, and vice versa.”


You might do a double take on that comment after you venture a look at GM’s current remarkably low tax bill.

A dive into GM’s filings with the Securities & Exchange Commission reveals that while the carmaker makes nearly all of its profits in the U.S., it pays virtually no U.S. federal, state or local taxes. The carmaker paid just $5 million in federal taxes last year, its SEC filings show. For its total federal, state and local bill, all in, it booked zero taxes, the filings show. Meantime, in 2015, GM paid more than $908 million in taxes to China, due to its profits from its joint ventures there, the filings show (see here:https://www.gm.com/content/dam/gm/en_us/english/Group4/InvestorsPDFDocuments/10-K.pdf).

GM’s historically low tax bill has flown under the radar screen in this presidential election season, when candidates from both parties offer ideas on reforming the corporate tax code. While the White House has railed against loopholes for big corporations, Democrat candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders continue to stump for getting companies to pay their “fair share,” and the GOP candidates largely push for lower tax rates.

Ask yourself, how come the candidates aren’t debating how the GM bailout is a textbook case of crony capitalism? A bailout in which taxpayers paid millions of dollars in “advisory” fees to companies like Evercore Partners to arrange, and given that GM is paying more in annual taxes in China than it is paying in the U.S.?

All in, GM got a $51 billion bailout, for which it refused to pay back some $10.5 billion to U.S. taxpayers, since that $10.5 billion hit arose from the Treasury Dept.’s losses on the automaker’s stock when it sold the shares in late 2013 (the bailout took the form of a loan and a 61% equity stake in GM by the Treasury Dept.).

The bailout was an “investment,” President Barack Obama insisted at the time, adding that it would cost taxpayers “not a dime.” The White House also held up the GM bailout as an example of how to battle China’s ascendancy in manufacturing, even though GM was mastering the art of outsourcing its new vehicle development and global export operations to the Middle Kingdom—to the point whereit has been touting the fact it will be the first U.S. carmaker to actually import and sell one of its Chinese-made SUVs, the Buick Envision, back into the U.S. this year (http://www.wsj.com/articles/gm-to-import-chinese-made-buick-suv-1447349781?mg=id-wsj). It’s estimated China plans to increase production in China by 65% through 2020.

The reason for GM’s low tax bill: A big fat tax break in the bailout. This sweetheart deal from the Obama Administration let GM deduct $45.4 billion in costs going forward, against current year taxes, even though it discharged those sums in bankruptcy.

The $45.4 billion included things like its losses in the years before GM entered bankruptcy, costs for its pensions and post-retirement benefits, as well as costs for its equipment and factories. That means the actual cost of GM’s bailout to taxpayers is much higher, likely on the order of nearly $75 billion, tax experts note.

Update: After this report was published on Thursday, General Motors made the following statement to FOX Business Network: “GM adheres to all applicable federal, state and local tax laws and regulations. Since 2009, we have also made significant investments in the U.S. – totaling approximately $17.8 billion – which have created approximately 6,250 new jobs and secured another 20,700 positions.”

http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/...sidential-debate-on-gms-crony-capitalism.html
 
GM is Government Moters.

Obama needs a legacy for some reason.
 
GM is Government Moters.

Obama needs a legacy for some reason.

And if the government didn't step in to help out GM, China would have bought them. Then you would be complaining how Obama let America's largest car manufacturer become Chinese owned.
 
You're acting like you could just instantly pump these things out and suddenly have all this profit.

The first year would operate at a loss tax wise. The second year would deliver product and what ever profit. Probably would not be a third year beyond just self.
Yes it does look better the longer the pay out is strung out, but my original point is that it has already been strung out for years and you get no credit for this time
tax wise.

This is the big problem with these extremely progressive tax schemes. For example let take the case where we both earn 2 million.
You do it 100k a year for 20 years. In my case here, I earn it over 20 years but the money all comes to the corporation in the 20th year. Then we are done.

You will pay 300k in taxes, a little a year, every year.
I will pay 960K in tax all in one year, the year of delivery and finial receipts. Could string it out with book keeping but that has other cost just keeping the corporation artificially alive.

I don't do this! I know of places where the bite is no where near this draconian. This country is a very poor place work for yourself with a payday years a part.
People that vote for this sort of stuff, have no idea what they are doing to their own possibilities.
 
Last edited:
And if the government didn't step in to help out GM, China would have bought them. Then you would be complaining how Obama let America's largest car manufacturer become Chinese owned.
Nope.

Not a fan of corporate welfare.

If China wants to buy them, good for China. Detroit might not have failed so badly, financially.
 
Where's the Presidential Debate on GM's Crony Capitalism?

From Fox Business...

In the 1950s, General Motors President Charles Wilson famously said: “What was good for our country was good for General Motors, and vice versa.”


You might do a double take on that comment after you venture a look at GM’s current remarkably low tax bill.

A dive into GM’s filings with the Securities & Exchange Commission reveals that while the carmaker makes nearly all of its profits in the U.S., it pays virtually no U.S. federal, state or local taxes. The carmaker paid just $5 million in federal taxes last year, its SEC filings show. For its total federal, state and local bill, all in, it booked zero taxes, the filings show. Meantime, in 2015, GM paid more than $908 million in taxes to China, due to its profits from its joint ventures there, the filings show (see here:https://www.gm.com/content/dam/gm/en_us/english/Group4/InvestorsPDFDocuments/10-K.pdf).

GM’s historically low tax bill has flown under the radar screen in this presidential election season, when candidates from both parties offer ideas on reforming the corporate tax code. While the White House has railed against loopholes for big corporations, Democrat candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders continue to stump for getting companies to pay their “fair share,” and the GOP candidates largely push for lower tax rates.

Ask yourself, how come the candidates aren’t debating how the GM bailout is a textbook case of crony capitalism? A bailout in which taxpayers paid millions of dollars in “advisory” fees to companies like Evercore Partners to arrange, and given that GM is paying more in annual taxes in China than it is paying in the U.S.?

All in, GM got a $51 billion bailout, for which it refused to pay back some $10.5 billion to U.S. taxpayers, since that $10.5 billion hit arose from the Treasury Dept.’s losses on the automaker’s stock when it sold the shares in late 2013 (the bailout took the form of a loan and a 61% equity stake in GM by the Treasury Dept.).

The bailout was an “investment,” President Barack Obama insisted at the time, adding that it would cost taxpayers “not a dime.” The White House also held up the GM bailout as an example of how to battle China’s ascendancy in manufacturing, even though GM was mastering the art of outsourcing its new vehicle development and global export operations to the Middle Kingdom—to the point whereit has been touting the fact it will be the first U.S. carmaker to actually import and sell one of its Chinese-made SUVs, the Buick Envision, back into the U.S. this year (http://www.wsj.com/articles/gm-to-import-chinese-made-buick-suv-1447349781?mg=id-wsj). It’s estimated China plans to increase production in China by 65% through 2020.

The reason for GM’s low tax bill: A big fat tax break in the bailout. This sweetheart deal from the Obama Administration let GM deduct $45.4 billion in costs going forward, against current year taxes, even though it discharged those sums in bankruptcy.

The $45.4 billion included things like its losses in the years before GM entered bankruptcy, costs for its pensions and post-retirement benefits, as well as costs for its equipment and factories. That means the actual cost of GM’s bailout to taxpayers is much higher, likely on the order of nearly $75 billion, tax experts note.

Update: After this report was published on Thursday, General Motors made the following statement to FOX Business Network: “GM adheres to all applicable federal, state and local tax laws and regulations. Since 2009, we have also made significant investments in the U.S. – totaling approximately $17.8 billion – which have created approximately 6,250 new jobs and secured another 20,700 positions.”

http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/...sidential-debate-on-gms-crony-capitalism.html
There are situations where a company can pay no federal income taxes in a year. A nol, or foreign tax credits lower taxable income or tax due. But they are still paying payroll federal taxes. And they are still paying state and local taxes.

Get the companies back investing in the usa by eliminating foreign tax credits.
 
Yep. Apple or GE or any of the infamous tax "evaders" write checks every quarter for many $billions directly to the US government. In effect, they're the tax collectors and they also pay the payroll and other taxes as well as telephone tax and all the rest of those sorts of taxes.
 
The first year would operate at a loss tax wise. The second year would deliver product and what ever profit. Probably would not be a third year beyond just self.
Yes it does look better the longer the pay out is strung out, but my original point is that it has already been strung out for years and you get no credit for this time
tax wise.

This is the big problem with these extremely progressive tax schemes. For example let take the case where we both earn 2 million.
You do it 100k a year for 20 years. In my case here, I earn it over 20 years but the money all comes to the corporation in the 20th year. Then we are done.

You will pay 300k in taxes, a little a year, every year.
I will pay 960K in tax all in one year, the year of delivery and finial receipts. Could string it out with book keeping but that has other cost just keeping the corporation artificially alive.

I don't do this! I know of places where the bite is no where near this draconian. This country is a very poor place work for yourself with a payday years a part.
People that vote for this sort of stuff, have no idea what they are doing to their own possibilities.


An What does Bernie think? He couldn't give a shit less. He knows I would never vote for him and his pandering schemes. He will go for the young guys and gals, whom have yet to think
of the problems Bernie will cause for them. No doubt years away yet. Damn! this is a crappy way to select a leader. About like voting for the cheerleader, but the ramifications are
so much more, and the cost of poor choices, beyond awful.
 
voting for cheerleader?



barfo
 
Just re-adopt the tax code as it was in 1961 when it worked.
 
The first year would operate at a loss tax wise. The second year would deliver product and what ever profit. Probably would not be a third year beyond just self.
Yes it does look better the longer the pay out is strung out, but my original point is that it has already been strung out for years and you get no credit for this time
tax wise.

This is the big problem with these extremely progressive tax schemes. For example let take the case where we both earn 2 million.
You do it 100k a year for 20 years. In my case here, I earn it over 20 years but the money all comes to the corporation in the 20th year. Then we are done.

You will pay 300k in taxes, a little a year, every year.
I will pay 960K in tax all in one year, the year of delivery and finial receipts. Could string it out with book keeping but that has other cost just keeping the corporation artificially alive.

I don't do this! I know of places where the bite is no where near this draconian. This country is a very poor place work for yourself with a payday years a part.
People that vote for this sort of stuff, have no idea what they are doing to their own possibilities.
If you adopt the percentage of completion revenue recognition method, you could recognize the revenue a little at a time over the course of the project. Although, someone like @JFizzleRaider would have to tell you if that would have an impact on your tax situation, or if you'd actually need to collect partial payments from the buyer.
 
or if you'd actually need to collect partial payments from the buyer

Well it took 18 years from start of design to the point of having a working prototype to show. We will not begin to collect if ever before we would commit to deliver. Need three orders first before we
would commit and collect any moneys from buyers. Not there yet.
 
And I am thankful for that.... because it's bullshit that as an American Bernie wants to penalize people for success. That is anti-American. Great idea, let's keep everyone in the middle or poor so we're all equal right? LOL F-Bernie.

Sure fix the wall street shit, and tax loopholes, but to raise taxes on people? No. I don't agree, regardless of how wealthy you are.

My boss is in the $500K-$2M bracket. He's one hard working dude, he also spends allot, contributes to our Portland community, and thanks to his success has doubled the jobs at our company. He paid like $400K in taxes last year and owes more now.

He's a liberal (albeit a smart one) and is scarred of what Bernie would do to our economy.
 
And I am thankful for that.... because it's bullshit that as an American Bernie wants to penalize people for success. That is anti-American. Great idea, let's keep everyone in the middle or poor so we're all equal right? LOL F-Bernie.

Sure fix the wall street shit, and tax loopholes, but to raise taxes on people? No. I don't agree, regardless of how wealthy you are.

When you raise taxes and then eliminate health insurance premiums you effectively lower taxes. Your health insurance premium is a tax that you must pay.
 
Nope.

Not a fan of corporate welfare.

If China wants to buy them, good for China. Detroit might not have failed so badly, financially.

Then why do you act like there are no such thing as oil subsidies?
 
The notion that you make more money because you work harder is a false one.
 
Then why do you act like there are no such thing as oil subsidies?

There are no oil subsidies. That's the truth.

There are green energy subsidies. The government writes checks to cover the costs of solar panels and to fund entire companies Those companies fail, even with the subsidies.

The government writes no checks to oil companies or to anyone who wants a subsidy to lower the cost of the product or service.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...een-energy-failures-leave-taxpayers/?page=all

On the other hand, if you want to consider the Low Income Home Energy Program to be an oil subsidy, by all means get rid of it. Or the strategic oil reserve put in place by Carter. Go for it.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/energys...persist-even-liberals-love-them/#380bc06c1e86
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top